General Question

Khajuria9's avatar

If a person kills himself out of curiosity, would you call it a bad act?

Asked by Khajuria9 (1836 points ) May 7th, 2014

If yes, why?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

70 Answers

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
longgone's avatar

Didn’t realize this was in General, too late to edit. Real answer:

I don’t believe there is anything after death. Therefore, killing yourself “out of curiosity” is a concept I can’t fully get behind, even in theory.

If you’re having suicidal thoughts, please go see a professional!

flutherother's avatar

Yes, because there are lots of things to be curious about before you die and dying is inevitable so your curiosity will be satisfied one day.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

Since death is merely a doorway to the next phase in our existence, then there can be no real harm done other than to his loved ones who will mourn his passing.
And for those who will say that he will be condemned to hell for this mortal sin I say pffft. There is no hell.
It does seem also a tad stupid to me as there is so much to do and see on this plane of existence that it would behoove those considering suicide to stop and reevaluate their circumstances and choices.

Response moderated (Unhelpful)
elbanditoroso's avatar

Bad? no. No evil intent.

Stupid, probably.

seekingwolf's avatar

No, because I don’t consider suicide to be an evil or immoral act. A sad act, yes, and suicidal people need treatment because they are often in an abnormal state of mind, not not evil.

I would say that it was stupid though because that person was going to find out what it’s like to die anyway. No sense going early when you can enjoy life now and find out what happens later. The fact that you will find out is one of the only things GUARANTEED to you in life.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

@Khajuria9 Ever see the movie Flatliners?

Crazydawg's avatar

I call it Darwinism at it’s finest.

LostInParadise's avatar

We can clear up a lot of language ambiguity by speaking in operational terms. What does it mean for me to believe something is bad? It means that I think that a person should be prevented from doing it and possibly punished for doing it or attempting to do so. Obviously we can’t punish someone who has killed himself, but using the other two criteria, I would define such an act as bad.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

What if they kill themselves with their diet and lifestyle choices?

josie's avatar

Curiosity is the yearning to know what you do not already know. Suicide would eliminate the ability to know anything at all after the act. So anyone who would commit suicide in the name of curiosity would clearly not understand the concept “curiosity”. So, in the case you present, whatever they thought was motivating them, in fact it would be stupidity,which is in fact bad, or insanity.

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

One who suicides from depression is sick. One who, like the Tibetans who have self-immolated, are simply desperate to be heard. One who suicides from curiosity is lacking in intelligence, but not bad.

marinelife's avatar

Because the decision is irrevocable.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

It’s my life and if I’m not hurting anyone else why can’t I make the call to end it? Hypothetical because I have a lot of peeps relying on me, but if I didn’t, why would that be bad. I make all kinds of choices every day. Seatbelt, no seatbelt, drive fast, drive careful. Isn’t life one big crapshoot?

RealEyesRealizeRealLies's avatar

Bad act = unnatural act. Because humans who pursue such things are going against the natural course of evolution. We are programmed to survive. Not to be stupid and destroy ourselves…

… although quite the opposite often seems more likely…

janbb's avatar

I guess whether i would consider it a bad act or not would depend on how many other people were hurt by the suicide’s choice.

Coloma's avatar

I’m the camp that people have every right to take their lives, but “curiosity” is not really a valid reason IMO. Being terminally ill, in chronic pain, or leading an inferior quality of life for many reasons, physically, mentally. financially, are all valid reasons to make a conscious choice to exit. I am a proponent of ones right to choose, just like a womans right to choose to terminate a pregnancy. My body, my choice, and I think if more people dropped the taboos and were able to freely discuss anothers wishes to terminate, there would be less trauma involved for all.

I think it is selfish that others want someone to stay alive if their quality of life is extremely compromised with little or no chance of turning around. How selfish is this?
” Stay alive and suffer and live a miserable quality of life, because we are too selfish and neurotic to let you go.” Pfft!

Coloma's avatar

I’d argue as well, that being evolved, means making choices to serve the greater good. If I am in ill health, without resources, and going to be a leech on family or the system, as well as living in a compromised state of being, I think the most “evolved” choice is to check out.
People that commit suicide are not cowards, it is an extreme act of bravery, to over ride base, biological programming in favor of the greater good of all.
To do away with an inferior existence and spare others the burden of your needs is an act of courage.

Khajuria9's avatar

Adiron, Yes I have seen that movie. It was exceptional. And, I do agree with all you said.
Why would people feel sad if I want my life to end. The ones who feel sad will also go someday, why that turmoil?

bolwerk's avatar

It would depend on the implications. If nobody else is ultimately harmed by it, I don’t see how it’s anymore than a neutral act.

Khajuria9's avatar

bolwerk, who else do you think can be ultimately harmed by such an act?

Mimishu1995's avatar

@Khajuria9 I think @bolwerk means “anyone except the one who kills himself”...

bolwerk's avatar

@Khajuria9: if you hatch a brood of sprogs and then kill yourself, leaving nobody else to take care of them, you’re kinda being a dick.

Khajuria9's avatar

bolwerk, I heard you. Thanks for your opinions. Have a nice day!

seekingwolf's avatar

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies

I really struggle with that sort of thinking. So anything that doesn’t further the “natural evolution” of humans is automatically bad? People like me who make an active choice not to have children (I have an IUD to prevent pregnancy and would not continue the pregnancy if it occurred)..are we “bad”? People who are gay and thus do not have biological children, are they “bad”?

I take “bad” to be “hurting others” (namely, taking something from them, restricting their rights/freedom) but I do not consider suicide to be immoral because you are not hurting others, just yourself. Making people miss you by leaving them (assuming you aren’t leaving major responsibilities beyond, like minor children) is not immoral. If you consider that immoral, then anyone who leaves ANYTHING (a school, a job) and makes their friends sad is doing something immoral.

I even extend this to drugs. Most drug abuse is immoral because the drug abusers, before they get addicted, choose to do drugs and forget their responsibilities. Plus, many drugs come from other countries and lots of people suffered/died over those drugs. But let’s strip that away.
Let’s take a person who can somehow make his own heroin in his backyard (from poppies), so he doesn’t contribute to the drug culture. He doesn’t sell it, it’s for his own use. He doesn’t talk about it with others. He has his own place and own job and doesn’t drive but he has a trust too so he doesn’t have to work, ever. He can just stay at home and get high. He doesn’t OD but he has health insurance to pay for treatment if he needs it.

Considering all that, is drug abuse immoral in this case? I would argue not.

Morality is determined by whether or not you’re being a dick to people. You can’t be a dick to other people when you’re completely by yourself like the man in my example. Choosing to live (or not to live) is also a very personal choice that cannot be dictated by other people. Making people sad/miss you is NOT immoral, or else you’d have to classify a billion other things like changing schools as immoral.

I have loads of respect for people who suffer from terminal illnesses who no longer want to live anymore and burden themselves/anyone and eventually commit suicide. I think that is a very noble choice and I fully support physician-assisted suicide.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

It would be all the way bad. Why? Because God is the only giver of life, it is rather arrogant for us to decide to take away a gift God graced us with. Now there will be many that will disagree but that is how I see it.

seekingwolf's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central

I am not religious and do not believe in any god(s) whatsoever.

Can you make a point for morality WITHOUT invoking the words “god”, “bible”, or “jesus”?

Or is morality inherently religious and thus can’t be explained/understood without religious terms?

bolwerk's avatar

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies‘s claim doesn’t hold up. Suicide is almost certainly an adaptive behavior. It probably happens precisely because there are circumstances where it helps us propagate our (or our ancestors’) genes.

Nobody is obligated to accept gifts, @Hypocrisy_Central. Least of all from someone else’s absentee daddy.

janbb's avatar

What would the curiosity be about, in any case?

seekingwolf's avatar

@bolwerk

Yes, and in many nomadic cultures, the feeble elderly would often stay behind when the group moved on or would wander away from the group. Both actions are suicidal because it would mean that the person would pass away. They did this because staying with the group would mean that they would hold the group back: both in speed and in resources, because they couldn’t contribute anymore and would still require food and care.

Self-sacrificing behaviour is not new to humans at all.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@seekingwolf Can you make a point for morality WITHOUT invoking the words “god”, “bible”, or “jesus”?
The OP did not pigeon hole this question to just secular logic, however, if I were to pigeon hole it there, I would have to say suicide is neither bad nor good, it is just what it is.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central Yes, god gave you life, but he also gave you Free Will which includes the ability to end your own life with no repercussions from him.

@josie Suicide would eliminate the ability to know anything at all after the act.
Not at all, since only your physical body ceases upon death. Everything else about you including your ability to know anything continues on.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dan_Lyons Yes, god gave you life, but he also gave you Free Will which includes the ability to end your own life with no repercussions from him.
That is how some see it, hope they were not mistaken; that would be a tragedy.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central Since God is Lovingkindness, and we are his/her children, do you really think s/he will punish us?

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dan_Lyons Since God is Lovingkindness, and we are his/her children, do you really think s/he will punish us?
Do you have children? Would you let your children just do what they please, much more stuff unprofitable for them? If you have children and you love them, do you let them do destructive things, and if you did, could you really say you love your kids? Those God loves he will chasten when they do stupid things, because he wants to correct His children for their own good; same as any secular earthly parents would do.

seekingwolf's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central

Do you believe that morality only has a religious basis, and thus secular logic/people can’t really make determinations about what is good/bad? Just curious.

That is how some see it, hope they were not mistaken; that would be a tragedy

oh boy, I love me some Pascal’s Wager

But I agree with you on the child bit. Punishment (or lack thereof) is no indication of whether or not someone loves you.
I find many things wrong with the god idea but this isn’t one of them.
I love my cats but I’ll still yell at them and spray them with a water bottle when they jump up on kitchen counters.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@seekingwolf Do you believe that morality only has a religious basis, and thus secular logic/people can’t really make determinations about what is good/bad? Just curious.
Seeing you asked in a respectful manner I will entertain the question, not because I expect you to get it but for your information. I do not believe morality has a religious base any more than I believe it was secularly derived. Religions have been very immoral and doing do blasphemed God before the non-believers. Do secular people use morality? Yes they do, same as religious people, and even believers can use or fall into immorality, greed, slander, lying and many other things. It is not exclusive for one group to use, the reasons for using them is where the separation comes. If I were to play the pure scientific angle, man certainly has no morality in himself. If all mankind derived from animals be they monkey, apes, some other primate, chickens, snakes, or whatever, man can no more break the innate hardwired code of its animal origin. In the wild the law of the jungle is the strong rules and the weak try to stay out of the way. Those who are old, weak, sick, or too young, are prey to stronger predators. Even the herd is not going to move at the pace of the youngest, sickest, or oldest; if they can’t keep up, they will be dinner for some other animal by nightfall, that is the way it is, there is no compassion or empathy for them, not by their herd or the lion, tiger, wolf, etc. that wants to make them dinner. The problem is when it comes to morality mankind wants to have his cake and eat it too. In short, secular people can be moral, just as believers can act immoral, good and evil is not exclusive to either group. Secular logic is rooted in the morality God placed on this planet; otherwise why risk the herd for the weak, sick, slow, etc. that would be illogical.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central We may be the energy of God and thus we are God, but for the most part none of us are on her level of sympathy, empathy and understanding.
No, I have no children whew but were I to have them now at my present level then I would answer yes, if God is big enough to give them free will, who am I to not do so too.
Of course this might not happen until they are a bit older. Say nearing their late teens.

seekingwolf's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central

No, I get it. What you said makes sense. Thanks for explaining it. I too don’t think it’s exclusive for one group to use. I am still exploring things about it. I haven’t formed a whole opinion on it as a whole. I don’t know if there is a “universal” morality that is inherent to humans or not.

You may find this interesting (I am not sure if it would conflict with your beliefs) but I was reading a book a long time ago about morality in nature. Some scientists do believe that humans developed morality out of necessity. In order to have a cohesive society, there needed to be some sense of morality. Do not steal. Do not covet thy neighbour’s wife. Listen to your parents. Don’t kill.
Societies that were essentially “free for alls” did not do well. in order to function as a society, as a group working together, there needs to be an element of trust. How can you trust your fellow man if it’s a free for all?

Just my thoughts. I think having a sense of morality can be compatible for everyone, religious and secular.

seekingwolf's avatar

I mean, I think the scientific view could even be compatible with believers: God understands the necessity of morality, and that’s why He made it.

bolwerk's avatar

If God exists, he could let us satisfy our curiosity. After we die, He could just put us back. Since He loves us so much!

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dan_Lyons *_No, I have no children whew but were I to have them now at my present level then I would answer yes, if God is big enough to give them free will, who am I to not do so too.
Of course this might not happen until they are a bit older. Say nearing their late teens._*
At what time you have kids, they will still have their free will, and they can defy your rules and orders. However, in your house which they live you are the de facto sovereign government; they abide by your rules, not the ones your children make up, unless you willing decide to follow them. Being that you are the de facto government of your household, you can impose sanctions or punishment on your kids for not doing as you tell them or how you say they should do things. The more mature they become and learn what to do and how to do it and have discernment to carry and conduct themselves as they have been taught by you, you give them more freedom to choose on their own, and more responsibility; same as God does. Any child of yours would have free will to defy you and go swim in the canal if they wanted. You can say do not do it and if you do and survive, and I learn of it, there will be a punishment of this or that waiting for you, it is up to them to go by your rules or their own desires. Free will lets man decide to do as he wants or to Follow God, if man chooses to go as he pleases there are repercussion, even if not immediate. The immediate penalty would be one you placed on yourself; you would have revoked your gift of life sooner than God had intended you to go.

@seekingwolf Some scientists do believe that humans developed morality out of necessity. In order to have a cohesive society, there needed to be some sense of morality. Do not steal. Do not covet thy neighbour’s wife. Listen to your parents. Don’t kill.
Societies that were essentially “free for alls” did not do well. in order to function as a society, as a group working together, there needs to be an element of trust. How can you trust your fellow man if it’s a free for all?
They (the scientist) have to believe that because they have nothing to fall back on. They can’t explain how man uses rules basically to not function like animals so they have to formulate some reason. Even in animal groups there is usually an Alpha Male and an Alpha Female, they did not determine this by diplomatic vote; the stronger male got the job by kicking but over all other males in the herd, clan, or whatever. He will be ”the boss” until he is too old, weak, or sick to hold off the young bucks nipping at his heels. Morality and rules are often interchanged with most people. You can have rules aka laws that have nothing to do with morality, laws to handle food, seatbelt laws, laws of aviation etc. then there are moral things that have nothing to do with law, (though sometimes laws are made to regulate certain moralities), cheating in a pick-up game of basketball, insulting people, being greedy, being stingy, laying on someone, gossip and such. Mankind used rules to live at piece and to keep from it being survival of the fittest, to do that, we have rules/laws. If it were strictly off logic and getting alone and had no morality derived from a deity per se, any woman would have complete autonomy over her body, and if she has an attractive body, can rent it for how long, and how much, to anyone wanting to pay her price. Off pure scientific logic, how could that be immoral, vile, or heinous?

Just my thoughts. I think having a sense of morality can be compatible for everyone, religious and secular.
It is, it just how one choose to believe where its origins is, is how one truly applies it in their heart.

I mean, I think the scientific view could even be compatible with believers: God understands the necessity of morality, and that’s why He made it.
There are many, many ways science line up with God, but many just want to cleave God out of it and try to go with logic alone.

seekingwolf's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central

You’re right on how Alpha Males/Females got their positions, although I don’t see how that’s immoral inherently. Humans do that too. We may not “beat” each other physically for the top, but we use our brains because that’s where our strongest power is. once the hierarchy is established, people keep to it until there are changes, and the cycle starts again.

Most laws have nothing to do with moralities.

I find prostitution gross (since I choose to be monogamous in my relationships, my personal choice, not done out of morality but rather out of my concern about getting STDs and I don’t like sex outside of a relationship) but I don’t find anything immoral with it, if the woman is an adult, isn’t coerced, and genuinely likes to do that.
I can see why religious people think it’s immoral, because of what God has said about marriage and whatnot. I just don’t share that belief, even though prostitution gives me the heebie jeebies.

But yeah, you’re right, secular people and religious people are going to disagree on the origins of morality. I guess in the end, it doesn’t really matter WHERE it came from, does it? It’s the end result. People being moral, regardless of where they think that morals come from.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

@Hypocrisy_CentralThe immediate penalty would be one you placed on yourself; you would have revoked your gift of life sooner than God had intended you to go.”

If God knows all things, and I commit suicide, then death must not have occurred sooner than God intended.

I sure am glad you’re not God.

Coloma's avatar

@Dan_Lyons Haha.,,,,EXCELLENT!

RealEyesRealizeRealLies's avatar

@bolwerk “Suicide is almost certainly an adaptive behavior. It probably happens precisely because there are circumstances where it helps us propagate our (or our ancestors’) genes.”
_

“Almost certainly” and “probably happens (precisely?)” is an interesting position.

I’m interested how suicide helps one almost certainly probably precisely adapt and propagate genes.

@bolwerk ”@RealEyesRealizeRealLies‘s claim doesn’t hold up.”

Do you deny that we are programmed to survive? That our entire genetic heritage is based upon this principle? And that you are here to have this conversation because your ancestors ran the program accordingly?

___________

@seekingwolf “So anything that doesn’t further the “natural evolution” of humans is automatically bad?”

Not what I said or implied. There is a vast chasm between destroying one’s self and choosing not to bring another life into the world. One can change their mind in time. The other cannot. One can assist fellow humans. The other cannot.

@seekingwolf “I take bad to be “hurting others”

Ok, we define bad differently. I use the dictionary definition. Your definition is closer to malicious, maleficent, perhaps even evil. None of those terms come anywhere close to the definition of the word “bad”.

Cars, computers, programs, electronics all go “bad” when they cease to operate as they are programmed. So do people.

@seekingwolf “Let’s take a person who can somehow make his own heroin in his backyard (from poppies), so he doesn’t contribute to the drug culture. He doesn’t sell it, it’s for his own use. He doesn’t talk about it with others. He has his own place and own job and doesn’t drive but he has a trust too so he doesn’t have to work, ever. He can just stay at home and get high. He doesn’t OD but he has health insurance to pay for treatment if he needs it. Considering all that, is drug abuse immoral in this case? I would argue not.”

I’ve never heard of such a person. Have you?

bolwerk's avatar

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies: survival is less important, biologically, than propagation. If suicide allows the suiciding individual’s/individuals’ genes to be propagated, it comes with a benefit to them (evolutionarily/biologically). Also, you’re falling into the common trap of looking at natural selection from the standpoint of propagating the individual exclusively. Evolutionary biologists and psychologists also look at group behaviors.

Take male homosexuality for example. It doesn’t necessarily the male to propagate his genes, but it does provide a helpful body for the community. It might be why male homosexuality evolved, and this is evidenced by gay men scoring higher on empathy tests than straight men. The gay male, as a nurturing part of a community, is still helping to propagate his parents’ and siblings’ (and tribe’s/community’s) genes.

RealEyesRealizeRealLies's avatar

“survival is less important, biologically, than propagation.”—

First things first friend. One cannot happen without the other.

“biologists and psychologists also look at group behaviors.”

Groups start with individuals. One cannot happen without the other.

seekingwolf's avatar

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies

I knew of only one such person, yes. Trust fund, has a house, keeps to himself, grows his own “stuff” (although not opiates), etc. But that’s not really important. I said that to make a point about how you can’t be immoral all by yourself. I would argue that the person I know is not being immoral. But most drug abusers are not like that.

And I suppose we are using different meanings of the word “bad”. I agree.

My taking the word “bad” to mean = malicious, evil is not wrong. You can take it that way. It’s just different from what you’re using.

DrasticDreamer's avatar

On topic: Stupid is more accurate because as many people have pointed out already, we all die at some point. Bad if leaving underage children behind, who you are obligated to take care of until adulthood the moment they enter this world.

Off topic: Suicide without curiosity as a “reason” is neither stupid or bad and typically stems from depression, which is an illness. Regardless of reasons, suicide is heartbreaking because people we love are always left behind and often scarred for life. Why, when we all die at some point, would it bother people so badly? Because we have the ability to love and we only get one chance to do it. Choosing to end your life early robs people of the love that they could both give to you and and gain from you.

There is no logical assessment to be done in terms of “good” and “bad” when it comes to suicide. Often those seeking to commit it think in such terms as a way for them to justify it in order to feel guilt-free. But suicide has nothing to do with logic and everything to do with emotion – which is exactly why some people manage to step back from the brink; because it hurts them too much knowing what their suicide might do to someone who loves them. Where others succeed in stepping back from the brink, others do not… because sometimes people feel so truly alone that they think death is the better alternative. But I’ve yet to meet a single person in my life who was not loved fiercely by at least one other human being. A human being who would be destroyed by their death, who would also, in some regards, be killed along with the person committing suicide.

I don’t know you, or why you asked this question, but I chose to answer this way just in case you’re contemplating suicide. Why do I care this much? Because my best friend committed suicide and sometimes I still feel like I failed him. It will, in varying ways, remain with me forever. Maybe someday, intentionally or by accident, I might be able to get someone to realize how loved they are.

Harold's avatar

Their curiosity will never be satisfied, because they’re dead and don’t know.

bolwerk's avatar

@RealEyesRealizeRealLies: some species build individual death into the very act of reproduction. In the case of humans, the self-termination seems to be about destroying oneself for the sake of keeping the rest of the group alive, improving the odds that similar genes (perhaps even ones’ own children) survive.

Granted. there are extreme cases like family annihilation followed by suicide that probably don’t fit this context and go back to mental illness.

Re “Groups start with individuals. One cannot happen without the other”: but individuals can and demonstrably do deliberately die for the sake of the group.

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

@DrasticDreamer Don’t feel you failed them. Sometimes the pain gets so bad they just want to end it and there really isn’t anything anyone can do to make them see it differently. I’m guessing they knew they were loved, but other things overwhelmed that.

cheebdragon's avatar

It’s an act of stupidity.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dan_Lyons If God knows all things, and I commit suicide, then death must not have occurred sooner than God intended.
So you are saying God should control a person wanting to exercise his/her free will to shorten their life? I do not believe God is micromanaging everyone’s life to the smallest iota, if that were the case no one would be lost. If I see you stringing a 4 inch rope between two buildings 35 feet up, during a 20 mph wind knowing you are going to try and walk across. I can know you are going to fall because you are untrained but knowing you are going to fall and not stopping you from falling are two different things.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central No, I’m not saying that God should control a person wanting to exercise his/her free will to shorten their life.

I’m saying that if I commit suicide, then my death must not have occurred sooner than God intended because God always knew when I would commit suicide and therefore she always intended that I die then.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dan_Lyons I’m saying that if I commit suicide, then my death must not have occurred sooner than God intended because God always knew when I would commit suicide and therefore she always intended that I die then.
To my understanding, and we all see through a glass dimly, works like such, HE can change things if He so purposes; He is a sovereign being. If there was something metered as to know when it would empty for example. An observer can either allow it to empty when it will based off the rate of evaporation, use, consumption, etc. or they can alter some condition to alter the time it empties, if God so desired, He can alter the conditions of anyone’s life to spare them if He purpose to steer them to Him, that is, if He reads the heart of such to know they will be responsive.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central She always knows I would die when I commit suicide, regardless of what anyone else thinks.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Dan_Lyons She always knows I would die when I commit suicide, regardless of what anyone else thinks.
Regardless of what she thought He intended you to die of old age, however, sometimes our actions cause us not to make it, driving drunk, being a dare devil, being murdered by the selfishness of others, and taking our own lives. Knowing you will die because the end was seen and doing something to prevent or change it are different things. If He had a plan for you to serve His good will, he can cause you to stumble and break your leg on the way to killing yourself and thus you would not be able to.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central She can cause you to stumble and break your leg on the way to killing yourself and thus you would not be able to

It’s funny you mention this as spraining my ankle is something that has plagued me my entire life, and generally prevented me from going off and doing something really stupid (not committing suicide, but still stupid).

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

^ You got what I said wrong, I guess you did not cut & paste, I said He as it should be. ;-P

Dan_Lyons's avatar

Hahaha, it’s okay @Hypocrisy_Central She doesn’t mind that you are stuck in the middle ages on this particular issue.
And of course, since He is God, then She is neither he nor she and yet both. How else could we all be made in Her image?

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

How else could we all be made in Her image?
I wasn’t made in the image of any her, but certainly by any means killing yourself would not be good. If I were made in her image killing myself would certainly mean nothing at all.

Dan_Lyons's avatar

Yes, I get that it is hard to teach an old dog new tricks. Don’t worry, God is just happy that you have discovered Her, even at so rudimentary a level.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

I think it is hard to get some people to accept His authority, but you will get to explain why you balked it one day :-)

Dan_Lyons's avatar

My brother is a fundamentalist thinker like you. No biggie. I am 50 to 100 years ahead of my time so I understand it will take you guys a long long time to finally catch up. but since it is not a race it is ok.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Yup…..you enjoy her, I hope you can be blessed by her the way He has blessed me, she has done nothing for me, so I will stick with him; but feel free to worship whoever, however you want. :-)

Dan_Lyons's avatar

It’s the same being you silly goose.

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

My imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

This question is in the General Section. Responses must be helpful and on-topic.

Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther